From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Paul Burton <paul.burton@mips.com>
Cc: Shawn Anastasio <shawn@anastas.io>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
"linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org"
<linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
"linux-mips@vger.kernel.org" <linux-mips@vger.kernel.org>,
"iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org"
<iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
James Hogan <jhogan@kernel.org>, Guan Xuetao <gxt@pku.edu.cn>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Subject: Re: cleanup the dma_pgprot handling
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 00:34:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190824223449.GC21729@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190823215759.zprrwotlbva46y33@pburton-laptop>
On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 09:58:04PM +0000, Paul Burton wrote:
> So I believe uncached & uncached accelerated are another case like that
> described above - they're 2 different CCAs but the same "access type",
> namely uncached.
>
> Section 4.9 then goes on to forbid mixing access types, but not CCAs.
>
> It would be nice if the precise mapping from CCA to access type was
> provided, but I don't see that anywhere. I can check with the
> architecture team to be sure, but to my knowledge we're fine to mix
> access via kseg1 (ie. uncached) & mappings with CCA=7 (uncached
> accelerated).
Ok. Looks like we can keep it then and I'll add a comment to the
code with the above reference.
_______________________________________________
iommu mailing list
iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/iommu
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Paul Burton <paul.burton@mips.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
"iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org"
<iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>, Guan Xuetao <gxt@pku.edu.cn>,
Shawn Anastasio <shawn@anastas.io>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>,
James Hogan <jhogan@kernel.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
"linux-mips@vger.kernel.org" <linux-mips@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org"
<linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: cleanup the dma_pgprot handling
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 00:34:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190824223449.GC21729@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190823215759.zprrwotlbva46y33@pburton-laptop>
On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 09:58:04PM +0000, Paul Burton wrote:
> So I believe uncached & uncached accelerated are another case like that
> described above - they're 2 different CCAs but the same "access type",
> namely uncached.
>
> Section 4.9 then goes on to forbid mixing access types, but not CCAs.
>
> It would be nice if the precise mapping from CCA to access type was
> provided, but I don't see that anywhere. I can check with the
> architecture team to be sure, but to my knowledge we're fine to mix
> access via kseg1 (ie. uncached) & mappings with CCA=7 (uncached
> accelerated).
Ok. Looks like we can keep it then and I'll add a comment to the
code with the above reference.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Paul Burton <paul.burton@mips.com>
Cc: Shawn Anastasio <shawn@anastas.io>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
"linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org"
<linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
"linux-mips@vger.kernel.org" <linux-mips@vger.kernel.org>,
"iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org"
<iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
James Hogan <jhogan@kernel.org>, Guan Xuetao <gxt@pku.edu.cn>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Subject: Re: cleanup the dma_pgprot handling
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 00:34:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190824223449.GC21729@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190823215759.zprrwotlbva46y33@pburton-laptop>
On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 09:58:04PM +0000, Paul Burton wrote:
> So I believe uncached & uncached accelerated are another case like that
> described above - they're 2 different CCAs but the same "access type",
> namely uncached.
>
> Section 4.9 then goes on to forbid mixing access types, but not CCAs.
>
> It would be nice if the precise mapping from CCA to access type was
> provided, but I don't see that anywhere. I can check with the
> architecture team to be sure, but to my knowledge we're fine to mix
> access via kseg1 (ie. uncached) & mappings with CCA=7 (uncached
> accelerated).
Ok. Looks like we can keep it then and I'll add a comment to the
code with the above reference.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Paul Burton <paul.burton@mips.com>
Cc: Shawn Anastasio <shawn@anastas.io>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
"linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org"
<linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
"linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org" <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
"linux-mips@vger.kernel.org" <linux-mips@vger.kernel.org>,
"iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org"
<iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
James Hogan <jhogan@kernel.org>, Guan Xuetao <gxt@pku.edu.cn>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
Robin Murphy <robin.murphy@arm.com>
Subject: Re: cleanup the dma_pgprot handling
Date: Sun, 25 Aug 2019 00:34:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190824223449.GC21729@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190823215759.zprrwotlbva46y33@pburton-laptop>
On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 09:58:04PM +0000, Paul Burton wrote:
> So I believe uncached & uncached accelerated are another case like that
> described above - they're 2 different CCAs but the same "access type",
> namely uncached.
>
> Section 4.9 then goes on to forbid mixing access types, but not CCAs.
>
> It would be nice if the precise mapping from CCA to access type was
> provided, but I don't see that anywhere. I can check with the
> architecture team to be sure, but to my knowledge we're fine to mix
> access via kseg1 (ie. uncached) & mappings with CCA=7 (uncached
> accelerated).
Ok. Looks like we can keep it then and I'll add a comment to the
code with the above reference.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-24 22:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-16 7:07 cleanup the dma_pgprot handling Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` [PATCH 1/6] MIPS: remove support for DMA_ATTR_WRITE_COMBINE Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` [PATCH 2/6] unicore32: remove the unused pgprot_dmacoherent define Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` [PATCH 3/6] arm-nommu: " Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` [PATCH 4/6] dma-mapping: remove arch_dma_mmap_pgprot Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:43 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-08-16 7:43 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-08-16 7:43 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-08-16 7:43 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2019-08-16 7:07 ` [PATCH 5/6] dma-mapping: make dma_atomic_pool_init self-contained Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` [PATCH 6/6] arm64: document the choice of page attributes for pgprot_dmacoherent Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 7:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 17:31 ` Will Deacon
2019-08-16 17:31 ` Will Deacon
2019-08-16 17:31 ` Will Deacon
2019-08-16 17:31 ` Will Deacon
2019-08-16 17:36 ` Mark Rutland
2019-08-16 17:36 ` Mark Rutland
2019-08-16 17:36 ` Mark Rutland
2019-08-16 17:36 ` Mark Rutland
2019-08-16 17:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 17:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 17:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 17:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-16 18:05 ` Will Deacon
2019-08-16 18:05 ` Will Deacon
2019-08-16 18:05 ` Will Deacon
2019-08-16 18:05 ` Will Deacon
2019-08-23 21:58 ` cleanup the dma_pgprot handling Paul Burton
2019-08-23 21:58 ` Paul Burton
2019-08-23 21:58 ` Paul Burton
2019-08-23 21:58 ` Paul Burton
2019-08-24 22:34 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2019-08-24 22:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-24 22:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
2019-08-24 22:34 ` Christoph Hellwig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20190824223449.GC21729@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=gxt@pku.edu.cn \
--cc=iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jhogan@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org \
--cc=linux-mips@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=paul.burton@mips.com \
--cc=robin.murphy@arm.com \
--cc=shawn@anastas.io \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.